|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 3, 2023 15:05:44 GMT
Ok lets summarise where we have got to... Oh yes, lets. 1) pollution - actually the data seems to show that in most cases of stop start traffic, the actual outcome is less not more pollution Which ignores main roads where the traffic tends to maintain steady speeds. 1) the pollution issue outlined as a negative is in practice a positive... If you ignore the main roads where the traffic tends to maintain steady speeds. 2) road safety - the data is not definitive... Yep, not definitive so we can ignore that then. 3) A feeling of safety - giving cyclists and pedestrians a greater feeling of safety and hence promoting their use rather than car use with obvious health and pollution benefits... Also not definitive, so we can ignore that too. It's beneficial as long as you ignore the obvious downsides. However, once you take into account the obvious downsides vs the nebulous benefits, the logical conclusion is that it's a pointless pain in the 'arris. You're welcome.  |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Oct 3, 2023 15:11:31 GMT
The main roads within cities I know are very very difficult to maintain steady 30MPG on in my experience. They keep on coming up to roundabouts, traffic lights, pedestrian crossings, congestion etc etc which make them stop start and that real world reality is where the benefits of the reduced speed limits kick in.
In the very rare example where 30mph roads do exist that allow traffic to maintain steady 30mph for extended periods separated from pedestrians etc, I have no objection in those very rare (in fact I am struggling to think of one) examples to leave the speed limit at 30mph. Is compromise a wonderful thing.....
|
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Oct 3, 2023 15:17:58 GMT
If it's a 'bloody nightmare' now restricted speeds will surely help. Of course they wont FFS rr. There are too many restrictions now with bloody bus lanes which are used for busses about twice a day. And god help the motorists if they drive in the bus lanes as they will receive a hefty fine falling onto their doormats. Bus lane restrictions need to be more consistent. The variety of different times and days when they're operative, shown on signs that are frequently obscured by other street clutter, is confusing...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2023 15:57:12 GMT
This interferance by the government is a direct attack on democracy
Speed limits in residential areas, in urban envioronments ARE NOT A MATTER FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, it is a matter for local authorities who are governed by elected councillors to represent the people who elected them.
If a Lib Dem, Tory or Labour council decides that 20 mph would be safer in a particular residential area, then it must be up to that authority to decide whether or not to impliment a 20 mph zone. If the local electorate and local residents oppose such a scheme, they can vote for a different candidate next time.
As long as local authorities do not impose these limits on motorways, trunk roads, primary routes or major routes, then the government should keep their noses out of what does not concern them.
|
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Oct 3, 2023 16:02:24 GMT
This interferance by the government is a direct attack on democracy Speed limits in residential areas, in urban envioronments ARE NOT A MATTER FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, it is a matter for local authorities who are governed by elected councillors to represent the people who elected them. If a Lib Dem, Tory or Labour council decides that 20 mph would be safer in a particular residential area, then it must be up to that authority to decide whether or not to impliment a 20 mph zone. If the local electorate and local residents oppose such a scheme, they can vote for a different candidate next time. As long as local authorities do not impose these limits on motorways, trunk roads, primary routes or major routes, then the government should keep their noses out of what does not concern them. Prove they are popular policies with the majority of the local electors who have voted for said councillors and don't waffle. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Oct 3, 2023 16:07:23 GMT
This interferance by the government is a direct attack on democracy Speed limits in residential areas, in urban envioronments ARE NOT A MATTER FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, it is a matter for local authorities who are governed by elected councillors to represent the people who elected them. If a Lib Dem, Tory or Labour council decides that 20 mph would be safer in a particular residential area, then it must be up to that authority to decide whether or not to impliment a 20 mph zone. If the local electorate and local residents oppose such a scheme, they can vote for a different candidate next time. As long as local authorities do not impose these limits on motorways, trunk roads, primary routes or major routes, then the government should keep their noses out of what does not concern them. What the fuck has democracy got to do with it? What about what the motorists want? There is a novelty you may like to ponder on. How many trees in our cities been cut down to make way for this bullshit by labour councils? This has fuck all to do with net zero its just an attack on our personal freedom and choice. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Oct 3, 2023 16:39:18 GMT
It is not even hard, show us who stood on a platform of 20mph roads and who didn't and who received the most votes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 3, 2023 16:47:47 GMT
30 km/h (20 mph) zones are very common, I'd even say the norm, in French villages and congested urban areas, especially in busy pedestrian zones and in the vicinity of schools. Nobody gets very aereated about it or demands a scientific inquiry into what seems like basic common sense. It's a nuisance as a motorist but there we are it's not the end of the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Oct 3, 2023 16:53:22 GMT
Tell me about this journey through city streets where you can average 30MPH for the entire journey, Pacifico. Not my experience tbh, I find traffic lights and pedestrian crossings and congestion tend to slow me down. So for a four mile journey I reckon with a 30mph limit it might take me around 15mins, with a 20mph limit maybe around 16mins. Does that sound about right to you. Are you denying that slower speed limits increase the duration of the traveling - if not then what is the argument, of course pollution will increase. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Oct 3, 2023 17:07:41 GMT
30 km/h (20 mph) zones are very common, I'd even say the norm, in French villages and congested urban areas, especially in busy pedestrian zones and in the vicinity of schools. Nobody gets very aereated about it or demands a scientific inquiry into what seems like basic common sense. It's a nuisance as a motorist but there we are it's not the end of the world. I think the thing that most of us don't like, it isn't being done in the name of safety, or environmental issues, it's purely down for financial gain, so we just want the lefties to cut to the chase, and do away with their bullshit lame excuses for money making rackets. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 3, 2023 17:13:16 GMT
This interferance by the government is a direct attack on democracy Speed limits in residential areas, in urban envioronments ARE NOT A MATTER FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, it is a matter for local authorities who are governed by elected councillors to represent the people who elected them. If a Lib Dem, Tory or Labour council decides that 20 mph would be safer in a particular residential area, then it must be up to that authority to decide whether or not to impliment a 20 mph zone. If the local electorate and local residents oppose such a scheme, they can vote for a different candidate next time. As long as local authorities do not impose these limits on motorways, trunk roads, primary routes or major routes, then the government should keep their noses out of what does not concern them. Total bollocks, as usual.
The Road Traffic Act should not be subject to local interference.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 3, 2023 17:14:12 GMT
30 km/h (20 mph) zones are very common, I'd even say the norm, in French villages and congested urban areas, especially in busy pedestrian zones and in the vicinity of schools. Nobody gets very aereated about it or demands a scientific inquiry into what seems like basic common sense. It's a nuisance as a motorist but there we are it's not the end of the world. I think the thing that most of us don't like, it isn't being done in the name of safety, or environmental issues, it's purely down for financial gain, so we just want the lefties to cut to the chase, and do away with their bullshit lame excuses for money making rackets. Is the right answer. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2023 17:40:12 GMT
Tell me about this journey through city streets where you can average 30MPH for the entire journey, Pacifico. Not my experience tbh, I find traffic lights and pedestrian crossings and congestion tend to slow me down. So for a four mile journey I reckon with a 30mph limit it might take me around 15mins, with a 20mph limit maybe around 16mins. Does that sound about right to you. Are you denying that slower speed limits increase the duration of the traveling - if not then what is the argument, of course pollution will increase. Going slower causes less pollution. "Reducing speed limits from 30mph to 20mph reduces brake and tyre wear, which contributes to particulate pollution. It also reduces fuel use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions when driving in an appropriate gear at a steady pace. A study showed an 8% reduction in NOx and PM10 emissions for 20mph compared to 30mph in diesel cars. 20mph limits massively cut toxic diesel emissions. Getting a vehicle to 30mph takes 2.25 times that to get to 20mph, and it is the repeated depletion (braking) and then acceleration to peak speed that uses most fuel. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2023 17:41:58 GMT
30 km/h (20 mph) zones are very common, I'd even say the norm, in French villages and congested urban areas, especially in busy pedestrian zones and in the vicinity of schools. Nobody gets very aereated about it or demands a scientific inquiry into what seems like basic common sense. It's a nuisance as a motorist but there we are it's not the end of the world. I think the thing that most of us don't like, it isn't being done in the name of safety, or environmental issues, it's purely down for financial gain, so we just want the lefties to cut to the chase, and do away with their bullshit lame excuses for money making rackets. This is Tory nonsenses. Just one child not killed by slower speeds is worth it. The '20 is plenty' is a Tory policy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2023 17:44:00 GMT
30 km/h (20 mph) zones are very common, I'd even say the norm, in French villages and congested urban areas, especially in busy pedestrian zones and in the vicinity of schools. Nobody gets very aereated about it or demands a scientific inquiry into what seems like basic common sense. It's a nuisance as a motorist but there we are it's not the end of the world. I think the thing that most of us don't like, it isn't being done in the name of safety, or environmental issues, it's purely down for financial gain, so we just want the lefties to cut to the chase, and do away with their bullshit lame excuses for money making rackets. That is a ridiculous statement if the speed limit is 20mph and you stay on or below 20mph you do not get a fine., going slower saves lives, what's not to like. |
|
